MANILA, Philippines — Backing a Supreme Court ruling that discourages the Commission on Elections from declaring an “unknown” a nuisance candidate, the Comelec now wants to revisit its rules and redefine what “nuisance candidacy” really is.
“Let us redefine nuisance candidacy based on the SC decision and in the context of our time. Let us redefine it,” Comelec Chairman George Garcia said in a media forum yesterday.
The current Omnibus Election Code empowers the Comelec to refuse or cancel a filed certificate of candidacy if it is meant to just put the election process in mockery or cause confusion among voters.
For Garcia, those who engage in these acts should be fined or put behind bars after the poll body establishes that there is bad faith in filing the candidacy.
The high court earlier ruled that the unpopularity of a person should not be made a basis in declaring a nuisance candidate.
“Declaring one a nuisance candidate simply because he or she is not known to the entire country reduces the electoral process – a sacred instrument of democracy – to a mere popularity contest. The matter of the candidate being known (or unknown) should not be taken against the candidate, but is best left to the electorate,” a portion of the ruling read.
Garcia agreed with the decision, saying “popularity is not and should not be the basis to disqualify a candidate.”
He said that during his years of private practice as election lawyer, he filed petitions against decisions that restrict the right of an individual to equal opportunity to run for public office.
Although agreeing with the SC, Garcia said the decision might lead to practical problems for the Comelec in future elections.
“This may result in a very long ballot because we cannot disqualify those filing COCs for certain reasons,” he explained.
An extra long ballot, Garcia said, can be avoided if Congress would enact a law redefining the meaning of nuisance candidacy. He added that he is willing to assist Congress in crafting a bill on the issue.